Well, good afternoon, everybody. Welcome to our half year interim results call for the six months ended 30 June 2022. Thank you very much for dialing in. I am joined today by Tanya Chikanza, our Finance Director, who will be co-presenting with me. I am pleased to report that we have begun 2022 in a strong position, building on the foundations we laid over the course of 2021 to grow our operations in a sustainable fashion and to build a cash generative business. I'd like to ask you if you could please just go to slide number three, and we can get into the meat of it. By the way, if I may just please note the disclaimers, which are customary and standard, and we'll consider those given. Are we on slide number three? Thank you very much. To start with the financial and operational highlights, which I will provide before Tanya goes into the granular details on the financials. Today is very much more Tanya's presentation, being about the financial results. The numbers we listed in this morning's announcement demonstrate a revenue of $76.2 million, a 62% growth from last year's revenue for the same period, supported by higher average realized vanadium prices. Further to this, we reported a positive adjusted EBITDA of $15.6 million and an operating profit of $6.1 million, up $26.4 million and $25.8 million respectively from this time last year. At the close of the first half of the year, we hold a cash balance of $7 million. Total borrowings reduced by about $4.2 million from December 2021. In terms of our operating cash flow statements, we had an operating cash flow of $8.7 million and free cash flow of $7.1 million, up on H1 of 2021 by $22.4 million and $26.9 million respectively. Now moving on to operations and highlights from the first half. Group production is up 4% at 1,641 metric tons of vanadium, and this is largely due to the work we put in over the course of 2021 in ensuring stability of operations, particularly at Vametco, which has been showing stable operational performance. Vanchem on the other hand, however, has been slower, has seen a slower ramp up following the Kiln 3 coming online, coupled with the impact of load shedding that we experienced in South Africa to a large degree. As such, we have decided to revise our guidance to between 3,900 metric tons of vanadium and 4,100 for the full year 2022. However, we still anticipate a group production run rate of 5,000-5,400 MTV per annum by the end of 2022. Some details in terms of the makeup of our group guidance that we will talk to. Specifically just highlighting that at Vametco, production has in fact been pretty solid, that has seen us increase the guidance at Vametco up to, from the previously guided 2,450-2,550, and that goes up to 2,550-2,650. At Vanchem, where those operational challenges I just alluded to, guidance has been revised downwards, from 1,550-1,750. That has come down to, 1,350-1,450 metric tons of vanadium. That is what gives the total revised group guidance of 3,900-4,100 MTV. In terms of cash costs, Vametco and Vanchem C1 weighted average production cash costs for the year was $28.32 per kg V, up 6% on last year's figure of $26.7 per kg V, and we'll unpack that a little bit further on. The mini-grid project at Vametco has now achieved financial close, and we're very pleased with that, enabling site clearance and progress with the project activities. Again, as we've indicated in the past, the value and the proposition of the mini-grid is in addition to demonstrating the viability of a renewable energy coupled with long duration energy storage, utilizing VRFBs, is that we also are well on our way to improving the energy security of our operations. I'm pleased to say that the construction of BELCO also, which is the electrolyte manufacturing facility in East London in South Africa, is now 80% complete in line with anticipated first production in H1 2023. Again, this is a project which will demonstrate the ability of the group to produce vanadium electrolyte for the energy storage sector from our resource base. Believing that this is an area of demand growth, we're quite excited to be in a position to participate in that growth opportunity. Barring any unforeseen events, we expect the uptick in cash generation to continue coupled with our positive adjusted EBITDA of $15.6 million, which is up 26.4% on the same period of last year. We expect the uptick in cash generation to continue into the next half of this year. From 2023, we expect a reduced capital expenditure rate, limited mainly to sustaining CapEx. Certainly, this will assist, we believe, the business to be in a stronger cash generating position, going forward. If we can go to slide four, please. Slide four provides just a reiteration of the company's investment case. So many of you will be familiar with it. We've come a long way since acquiring Vametco several years ago, and now are the owner of two of only four primary vanadium facilities globally with a substantial resource base to fit them. It's quite important to emphasize here that as a company, I think we have made the point before that we believe that the future of vanadium supply lies with primary production. With only four such operating plants in the world, and with Bushveld owning two of those, with scalability, we believe that we're in a very, very strong position going forward. We are well-placed in a market that will increasingly look to primary producers. Given the age of the assets that we have acquired, however, we do have to be measured in implementing our growth aspirations. That's why we remain committed to maximizing the production capacity of our plants. Our immediate short-term focus is to ensure that the production base is stable, it's sustainable, and it is cash generating. Following the commissioning of Kiln 3, expected result in group production level is 5,000-5,400. We think that this places the company in a really good position in terms of positive margins and cash generation going forward. We have completed growth studies, which provide a clear roadmap for growth to 8,000 MTV per annum. A journey that we have said we will only embark on once we have achieved our short-term production targets, and once we have improved our balance sheet capacity to invest in such. I'd like to move on then to slide number six to delve a little bit more on our operations and performance. As indicated at the start, production was 4% higher relative to H1 2021, owing to Vametco's continued stable operational performance. Vanchem's production, however, during the period was lower than anticipated due to lower recoveries associated with Kiln 1, which was winding down, significant electricity load shedding we experienced, and a slower than planned ramp up post Kiln 3 coming online. We talk about the impact of load shedding at Vanchem more than at Vametco because of the setup Vanchem has being connected to the municipal electricity grid system. Which means that when there is load shedding at Vanchem, we do lose power. Whereas at Vametco, which is connected to Eskom directly in instances of load shedding, all that we experience there is curtailment of power, which is the reason why load shedding has a particularly more marked impact on Vanchem compared to Vametco. Since August, we have seen an improvement in the performance of Kiln 3. I'm pleased to note with production of 61 MTV in July increasing to 151 MTV in August. We have seen this improved operational performance continue into the month of September. We're particularly pleased with the availability performance numbers that we are seeing. When you do start getting to the levels where you have sustainable high levels of availability, that then really places you in a position where you can focus more on yields and efficiencies, which is where we are now. Despite the improved operational performance, however, this has not been sufficient to make up for the volumes that we lost in previous months. With load shedding continuing to pose a significant risk, Vanchem's production and cash cost guidance for the full year has been revised to between 1,350 MTV and 1,450 MTV. At Vametco, we have massively increased production guidance to between 2,050 and 2,650 MTV, given its strong year-to-date operational performance and the minimal impact of load shedding on operations, as I've just described. Despite the 2022 guidance revision, the group remains confident in achieving its steady-state production run rate of between 5,000 and 5,400 MTV per annum by the end of 2022. This is supported by Kiln 3 ramping up according to plan for the rest of the year. Now, if we can move on to slide seven. Our cash cost improvements at Vametco have been supported by the increase in production volumes, which resulted in a $6 decrease in cost and the weaker USD exchange rate of ZAR 15.39 to the US dollar. Conversely, increases at Vanchem are due to the lower than anticipated volumes following the slow ramp up of Kiln 3 and the higher costs associated with additional maintenance required as Kiln 1 reached the end of life. To make the point that if there's anything that these costs make a point that they make particularly loudly, it is the importance of stable, sustainable production with the throughput levels that we have targeted. When we get to see those increased throughput volumes, we certainly anticipate to see that impact come through in the form of reduced unit costs going forward. I want to pause at this point and hand over now to Tanya, who's now gonna take us through our financial results. Thank you, Tanya. Thank you, Fortune. Good afternoon, everyone. If I can just turn to slide nine, the income statement. As you can see from the table and the EBITDA waterfall on the slide, adjusted EBITDA improved by a total of $26.4 million from a year ago, largely thanks to major lift in revenues. The group reported revenues of $76.2 million compared to $47 million in H1 2021. Driven by a higher average realized price of $46.40 per kg V from $29.2. The improvement in adjusted EBITDA and operating profit was significantly supported as well by a weaker rand to US dollar exchange rate, which had an overall positive impact of $10.8 million on adjusted EBITDA over the 12-month period. Just for completeness, the exchange rate there weakened to 15.4 from 14.5 in the prior year. This is something we're quite aware of, and we have got Forex and sales hedging options that we are currently looking at to ensure that we do not have these kind of large swings in Forex movement. The loss in JV that you have there for the first year is in respect to the VRFB and Vametco mini grid of $1.9 million. The increase in financing expenses from $3 million- $5.3 million shown on the table is primarily associated with Orion's production financing agreement interest, which includes notional interest of $1 million calculated in accordance with IFRS 9. Nedbank's revolving credit facility interest of $0.2 million was incurred during the period, and the Orion convertible loan interest of some $2.3 million. Loss for the period was $3.2 million compared to $19 million in H1 2021. If I turn to slide 10, just looking at our cost per unit sold. The cost of sales, excluding depreciation for the period, crept up to $44.7 million, compared with $43.4 million in H1 2021. The increase was primarily due to the higher energy costs of $8.8 million, an increase in staff costs to $13 million, mainly due to the annual wage increase, and the higher labor costs associated with the commissioning of Kiln 3. The increase was partly offset by the positive effect of foreign exchange with the weaker rand to US dollar exchange rate, resulting in a positive effect of $2.6 million. Despite inflationary pressures, raw material prices of $14.2 million remained flat relative to the corresponding prior period. As shown in the waterfall chart, the group cost per unit sold, including sustaining capital, decreased to $37.8 per kg V from $39.7 per kg V a year ago. The reduction in costs was underpinned by a weaker exchange rate, higher sales volumes, and a lower stay in business CapEx. The reduction was partly offset by an increase in G&A and operating costs. While production volume growth is expected to contribute the most to reducing costs, the company continues to explore opportunities to drive costs down further. These efforts are focused on procurement, as previously announced, as well as other significant cost drivers such as maintenance spend, payroll, and administration costs. The previously announced cost savings program aims to ensure continued competitiveness throughout the commodity cycle, while enhancing our product offering to markets across the geographies and industries in which we compete. We performed a diagnostic analysis of an addressable baseline procurement spend of around $55 million, and achieved a cost savings in the period of $0.5 million. We still aim to achieve annualized savings of between $2.5 million-$4 million over a 24-month period. Notwithstanding short-term inflationary pressures that are being experienced across several input costs and a direct result of global rising inflationary pressures on inputs such as energy costs. I can just turn to the balance sheet on the next slide 11. As you can see on this slide, we have made some progress in reducing our overall debt position, with gross debt, including leases, reducing from $85.4 million in December 2021 to $81 million in June 2022. We continue to pay down the Nedbank RCF and pay the interest on the Orion convertible loan notes, which accrues on a quarterly basis. The Nedbank RCF, which is being repaid at a rate of around $44.4 million per month, will come to an end in November 2022 and will be fully repaid by then. If we turn to slide 12. Just looking at our balance sheet and cash flows. Net cash generated from operating activities of $8.7 million was an improvement from the prior year period, driven primarily by the improved earnings. Sustaining capital expenditure of $1.6 million, which was $6 million in prior year period, was mostly spent at Vametco, as growth capital expenditure was prioritized at Vanchem with the commissioning of Kiln 3 that Fortune talked about just now. The group generated free cash flow of $7.1 million after sustaining capital, an increase of $26.9 million. The increase in cash used in financing activities of $4.7 million is due to the monthly repayment of the Nedbank RCF, totaling $2.8 million, and royalties paid on the Orion production finance agreement of some $2 million. Capital expenditure and investing activities for the period totaled $9.8 million, mainly due to the refurbishment of Kiln 3 at Vanchem and the construction of BELCO. We ended the period with a cash and cash equivalent balance of $7 million, and I'm pleased to say that the cash generation has continued into second half of this year. As previously mentioned, borrowings reduced from $80.9 million to $76.7 million, primarily due to that partial repayment of the Nedbank RCF, payment of the interest on the Orion amounts, as well as a weaker exchange rate, partially offset by the convertible loan notes that we issued to Primorus as part of the Mustang transaction. Turning to Slide 13. Here we just trying demonstrate how the EBITDA has flowed into cash. You'll see from this slide that capital expenditure included in the CapEx spent for Kiln 3 at Vanchem and the construction of BELCO and investment in the Vametco mini grid, and altogether they came out to about $10 million. Loan repayments, namely the Nedbank, were also a large factor. Our inventories and receivables also rose due to previously highlighted market conditions and the logistical constraints that we have faced. We would expect this to unwind to more normalized levels over time. Overall, we have seen a solid financial improvement for the company, and barring any unforeseen circumstances, we expect positive adjusted EBITDA and free cash flow to continue into the second half of 2022, and this will be used to meet the remaining capital requirements and debt repayments. In addition, following the commissioning of Kiln 3, we forecast a reduced capital expenditure rate at these operations, limited mainly to sustaining CapEx, which is expected to support positive cash conversion of EBITDA, particularly as the increased production volumes of Vanchem's Kiln 3 are realized. Thank you. I will now pass it back to Fortune. Thank you, Tanya. If we can move on to slide number 15, and I'd like to just talk through a summary of the near-term catalysts. The group expects to see an even stronger operational performance in the second half of 2022. This supported by improved stability at Vanchem and as Vametco continues to increase its volume throughput. However, heightened load shedding continues to pose a significant risk. Supported by the ramp-up of Kiln 3 at Vanchem, we remain confident that the company will achieve its group production run rate of between 5,000 and 5,400 MTV by the end of 2022. Barring any other unforeseeable events, Bushveld anticipates that this run rate will be the group's future sustainable production run rate that best supports cost reduction and margin increases. Of course, the group retains the optionality to expand its production to 8,000 MTV per annum through a phased expansion plan, subject to securing the necessary funding and meeting our short-term performance targets of between 5,000 and 5,400, and also subject to us meeting our short-term objectives of strengthening our balance sheet. Regarding other critical initiatives, we anticipate our electrolyte plant, BELCO, coming online and into production during H1 2023. BELCO will remain within Bushveld, both operationally and in ownership, post the Bushveld Energy carve-out. In terms of the Vametco hybrid mini-grid, we expect it to come online in H1 2023, completed about the same time as the electrolyte plant. We continue to support the growth of CellCube through our 25.25% investment in the company, which is very well positioned, particularly as long-duration energy storage momentum continues to grow apace. As noted in the 2021 annual report, having incubated the energy division and created the critical mass we believe necessary to ensure its success, Bushveld Minerals intends to carve out Bushveld Energy as a standalone company focused on the vanadium redox flow battery value chain. We believe this will crystallize its value and also attract the appropriate investors with a greater understanding, appreciation of energy and the energy transition. Bushveld plans to retain a substantial share in the carved-out entity and thus retaining the vertical integration, which is such an important part of its business model. The proposed carve-out process is underway and is planned to be completed by the year end. On this note, I want to take the opportunity to thank you all for your presence here on this call. I would like now to take questions from the audience. Thank you very much. Thank you. If you would like to ask a question or make a contribution on to this call, please press star one on your telephone keypad. If you would like to withdraw your question, please press star two. The first question comes from the line of John Meyer calling from SP Angel, please go ahead. Good afternoon, Fortune and Tanya. Thank you for the interim results. I've got a number of questions, but if I can just start off on focusing on energy prices. I was a little bit unclear about how you connect to Eskom at Vametco and at Vanchem. It seems you've got different connections there. If you could just run us through that again. Also, can you talk through what the cost of electricity is in South Africa and now how that's impacting you? As I remember, I think you use a bit of pulverized coal at Vametco. Can you just talk about how much of that you're using and what the cost implications of that are? Thank you. Thank you, John, for the question. Let me start off talking to the difference between Vametco and Vanchem when it comes to Eskom. Vametco is connected directly to the Eskom grid, and it has a contract that many energy intensive operations typically have, which is contracted directly with Eskom. The implications of that. Sorry, before I talk about the implications of that, Vanchem, on the other hand, is connected to the municipal grid system. What that means is that when there is load shedding, typically what happens is Eskom will, for parties that are on what's called the Megaflex tariff regime, which are connected directly to Eskom, they will be asked to reduce their consumption levels of energy. They will not necessarily get shut off. Whereas on the other hand, when you look at someone like Vanchem, which is connected directly with Vanchem, when there is load shedding between four and six, that means we don't have any power. To mitigate against that, what we do is we run generators to ensure that certain critical aspect of the plant continue running, and the most important one here being the Kiln. Because the Kiln takes a lot of time to heat up, that's one part of the process that you don't want to have a lot of stop-starts. Obviously, because of running a generator, that means that your energy costs are going to be higher, because these generators we keep them on a standby basis. I should also add that the fact that we are on a municipal contract at Vanchem, the municipalities typically do add a markup to the tariffs that they on-charge to customers. This is an inherited situation, something that we are working to address. You know, we will like to address it in a number of ways, but one of them includes moving to a contracting regime that is similar to Vametco. In other words, when there's load shedding, what you have is curtailment rather than complete loss of power. I should also mention that this is where the self-generation initiatives will come in handy. We do intend to take full advantage of the regulatory framework that has been established for parties to generate power for self-consumption with limited regulatory hurdles. Now, the mini grid that we talked about earlier on is very much a proof of concept, supplying only about 10% of Vametco's requirements, and I would say about 5% of our group requirements. To the extent that we can demonstrate that renewable energy with storage can meet our power requirements on a cost competitive basis, you know, it's a very positive step towards greater energy security, both in terms of availability and in terms of the cost of that energy. That's the difference between Vametco and Vanchem. Now, let me just comment a little bit around the cost of electricity, and I'll ask Tanya perhaps to also come in here. But just one point, contextual I want to highlight, and I'm mindful that with what's going on around the world, with coal prices, you know, that are trading in excess of $350, with the consequence of significant inflation on energy prices around the world. I do need to make the point, though, that that is not South Africa's reality. The reason for that is that Eskom procures coal for its power plants based on long-term contracts, and those long-term contracts are not tied to the kind of international prices that we're seeing with coal. We're not really worried that the runaway coal prices we've seen will translate into massive inflation for electricity prices here in South Africa. I think that distinction is very, very important to just highlight. Having said that, our own utility here, I think that it is fair to say that we have been seeing some inflationary pressures on the tariffs. We are gonna have to deal with that going forward still. Again, not anywhere near the sort of scale that we're seeing in the international markets. Tania, do you wanna perhaps just add a little bit more color in terms of the energy cost inflation that we actually now have experienced? Well done. Yeah. Thanks. Thanks, Fortune. Yes, in terms of energy, as you mentioned, you know, we've got different components. We've got the cost of diesel, which we use mainly actually to supplement when we have load shedding. As you can appreciate, the diesel cost has been going up, so that's been counterintuitive in a way. We've had those kind of rises. We've got the statutory increases in electricity that normally come in in April. There was that hike. I think, you know, this is an area where, you know, we haven't seen the levels that you have, you know, that you've been experiencing say in Europe, for example. They're still significant. For a business, it actually just becomes a balancing act between how do you make sure that you still have production going through and managing those costs. I'm quite happy to have a chat with you around just breaking that down around the different lines, John, offline, if you'd like some percentage increases, some specific percentage increases. Thank you. May I ask another question? I saw something recently that suggested that all or most, or all of Europe's electric arc furnaces for steel production had been turned off. This would be scrap recycling, I assume. Do you expect the market to lose much vanadium from that? Is this something you've seen? I just wonder if you have any information or color on it. Yeah. John, we have commented in the past around the growing EAF share of steelmaking. Let me explain it as follows. If you look at the total global steel market, we do note that, you know, China has been on this path of rationalizing its steel production. We have pointed out in the past that any new steel capacity being developed in China is more in the mode of EAFs, targeting scrap feedstock. The implications of that, I guess the question is what are the implications of that in terms of both vanadium demand and supply? We think in terms of vanadium demand, it is neither here nor there really. I think the demand for vanadium in steelmaking will continue to drive from the growing intensity of use associated with the standards that have been introduced in China and will continue to be enforced in our view. We think that the emergence of hubs such as India you know which are noted recently has now emerged as the third largest economy in the world, and there's a lot of activities in that space. We do expect it to continue to support demand within the steel sector. I think that where the question around the EAFs you know one might wanna look at it in more detail is how it impacts on supply. Now we typically trace the production capacity of the co-producers. As you know, 70%+ of the world's vanadium comes from co-producers in Russia and in China. What has been particularly interesting is to note the utilization levels are over time. Those levels have been growing. In fact, we saw some acceleration when steel prices, you know, rose in recent years. Our view has always been that, when you see those co-producers hit, you know, maximum utilization, the additional supply required of vanadium, in our view, is not going to come from co-producers. In other words, we don't believe that we're gonna see new co-production capacity coming on stream. The new steel capacity that we see coming on stream is more in the mode of electric arc furnaces, as you correctly described. What it does mean is that, in a world that's gonna require more vanadium, you know, even more emphasized by the growing demand from the energy storage applications. In that world, primary producers, in our view, and to some extent secondary producers, are best positioned to meet that growing demand. Certainly, in terms of the future growth of steel production, or let me not call it growth of steel production, because I think what we'll see more is rationalization. If you look at any new capacity that comes on stream, we don't believe it's going to be of a co-production nature. It's gonna be much more of the electric arc furnaces, which does not produce vanadium slag because that is not the feedstock it utilizes. I hope that answers your question, John. Yes, that does. Thank you, Fortune. The next question comes from the line of Mark Ryan calling from Tellur Capital. Please go ahead. Hello, good afternoon. I have three questions, if I may. Could you confirm where VEL and VRFB-H/Enerox will fit when BE is carved out? Secondly, is there sufficient demand to operate the electrolyte plant at capacity of 200 megawatts from the start of production? And if not, when do you expect that capacity to be reached? And thirdly, we were told that Bushveld Energy was involved with various tenders, including Eskom. There's been no announcement. Why has BE failed to win any projects outside the Vametco mini grid in almost eight years? Thank you. Thank you, Mark, for your questions. Let me start with the first one, which is where VRFB-H and VEL will sit. For the benefit of everybody else, VRFB-H is a holding company that controls 50% of the VRFB manufacturer, CellCube, based in Austria. VRFB-H is 50.5% held by Bushveld Energy, sorry, with the other shareholders being Mustang Energy PLC, the London-listed company, as well as a private company called Acacia. Now, the carve-out process, what we have said is we're taking all our energy assets, and we're putting them under one vehicle. In this respect, VRFB-H will sit under the carve-out Bushveld Energy entity. Similarly, VEL, which essentially is a joint venture entity that we created with Invinity Energy Systems a couple of years back, with the objective of deploying vanadium electrolyte in a rental model. If you're familiar, for example, with the Energy Superhub Oxford project that has been in the news recently, the vanadium in that particular project was supplied under this joint venture on a rental basis. That's also part of the Bushveld Energy assets that will be part of the carved out energy vehicle. The second question you asked relates to the electrolyte plant. Look, we built the electrolyte plant without committed signed offtake contracts. The implication of that is that in the interest of prudence, we had to ensure that the ramp up is designed over a reasonable period as demand picks up. We are not expecting to be running BELCO at full capacity in year one. In fact, we expect to be ramping up to the 200 MWh capacity over several years. In our financial model, we have built in sufficient working capital requirements to support that. We certainly do believe that the demand will be there. Having said that, you know, we are fairly clear that ramp up to full capacity will take several years. More specific details around this and more around BELCO, we will provide that, you know, with much more BELCO-focused or energy-focused updates, which we will provide during the course of this year. Now, the last question was in respect of Eskom and why we haven't seen any VRFBs awarded in the Eskom project. I will talk to the Eskom, and then I'll just step back a bit and give a much more holistic view around the South African market itself. Eskom went to tender for long duration energy storage projects, I think a total of about 1,400 MWh. That has been structured in three different packages. You know, some of those packages have been out, but there's still some which are still coming out. I must make the point that when it comes to long duration energy storage, there is still work to be done in terms of how these projects are procured, how the tenders are structured. I'll give you an example. When you look at VRFBs, they are long lifecycle systems with 20-year-plus life. Therefore, where we deploy them, we like to deploy them where that long lifecycle is recognized and appreciated. I think in reality, a lot of stationary storage systems that are being procured to date are still predominantly focused on the upfront CapEx. What is the capital per kilowatt hour that the system will require? Whether it's gonna need replacement in five years, in seven years or in 20 years. We are seeing the landscape evolving, but I think it's fair to say that we still see very much procurement processes that favor technologies of the likes of lithium-ion. We are comfortable that VRFBs are very competitive in terms of long duration storage and long lifecycle systems. We are seeing, I think, a greater appreciation of this, and that's why we remain fairly optimistic that we will see more VRFB systems being deployed. In other markets, we've certainly seen this trend. I mean, if you look at China, for example, where the largest battery systems being deployed are VRFB systems. So we remain hopeful in that respect. Having said that, I think I must also just mention that Eskom has not completed its procurement program. You know, it's only done, I think, one or two packages that have been announced. There's still other packages that will still be announced. It is also quite important that whatever scale at which these projects are announced, that VRFB manufacturers have the capacity to respond in the time that these systems need to be built. I think that's one of the areas that it requires some work still. Most VRFB companies don't yet have manufacturing scale to respond at the kind of scale that some of these orders or these tenders require. It's an area which we're comfortable will be resolved as time goes. The good news is that to achieve scale, VRFB systems don't require gigawatt scale type of orders. We will see that scale developing fairly quickly, we believe. That's one of the reasons why we got involved in the first instance, is to help mobilize capital towards scaling up manufacturing capacity. We certainly expect and hope to see CellCube in a place where it can be competing for some of these systems. Broader than Eskom, the requirements and the demand for long duration energy storage are growing. I mean, our own South African government's Integrated Resource Plan has set up a target of 2,000 MWh of energy storage long duration, with the first window, bid window coming up soon at about 500 MW. The embedded generation program itself is gonna require a lot more energy storage. I think again, if I talk about our mini grid, the value of that mini grid is that it demonstrates that you can deliver renewable energy with VRFB storage, by deploying power at a cost in terms of tariffs that is competitive, with that project having project economics that are sufficiently attractive for third-party equity and commercial debt to be made available. That's why we're very excited about the mini grid in terms of the doors that we think is going to open up for companies such as CellCube. Let me just take the opportunity again to thank everybody for your time for this call and for your questions. If there are any further questions, I do, we do remain available, whether on email, please do get in touch with us. We certainly look forward to seeing you again at the next update call. Thank you very much.